Biden tanks in polls

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim when you use your black on black crime line to distract from talking about police brutality.

It’s like making sugar cookies then throwing in a handful of chocolate chips .. and saying I didn’t change anything it’s still a cookie

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’m not mentioning black on black crime to deflect away from the police. people
with IQs above 65 can think about two things at once. im sorry if you don’t fall into that category.

but we can prioritize.

i mention black on black crime ( and the fact that the left refuses to discuss it) to prove that the left doesn’t really care about black lives. the left is only interested in black deaths which help them win elections, and only deaths at the hands of white cops ( a minuscule percentage of black homicide victims) help
democrats win elections.

Democrats want blacks to stay right where they are. in the cities, in huge numbers, completely dependent on government to survive, with no hope of large scale upward economic mobility. because democrats are afraid if they all
move into the middle class, they’ll vote republican. democrats have replaced 1830s plantations with today’s failing cities. and any black who dares wander off the reservation to identify as a republican, s branded an uncle tom sellout. try making that wrong.

Thats why democrats like all you here, refuse to talk about black on black crime, and things like fatherlessness, which is by far the first thing that needs to be addressed. it’s why you’re all opposed to school choice, despite referring to yourself as pro choice, an idiotic title to bestie upon yourselves. you desperately want them to fail to thrive, so they can remain a reliable
voting block.

liberals see what’s going on in the cities today, and conclude blacks need more of the same. conservatives look at what’s going on in the cities and say that what we’re doing isn’t working, these people deserve better. which is obviously why we advocate for school choice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

conservatives look at what’s going on in the cities and say that what we’re doing isn’t working, these people deserve better. which is obviously why we advocate for school choice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just NIMBY

As you said before:
“No, because many people work their butts off to be able to move from Hartford to West Hartford specifically for the schools, and they deserve that.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just NIMBY

As you said before:
“No, because many people work their butts off to be able to move from Hartford to West Hartford specifically for the schools, and they deserve that.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

who says not in my backyard? that may be your instinctive reaction, and it’s probably a big reason why liberals oppose school choice. That’s your racism, keep it to yourself please.

i clarified my comment you posted ( you conveniently forgot that) to say that i’m opposed to forcing suburb kids to go to school in the cities. i’m all in favor of getting good students out of the cities failing schools and into good schools. liberals are the ones who oppose that. conservatives love it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

who says not in my backyard? that may be your instinctive reaction, and it’s probably a big reason why liberals oppose school choice. That’s your racism, keep it to yourself please.

i clarified my comment you posted ( you conveniently forgot that) to say that i’m opposed to forcing suburb kids to go to school in the cities. i’m all in favor of getting good students out of the cities failing schools and into good schools. liberals are the ones who oppose that. conservatives love it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But you’re the one who decided that it would become “forced busing”
Redlining and exclusionary zoning is just the workaround
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

But you’re the one who decided that it would become “forced busing”
Redlining and exclusionary zoning is just the workaround
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not sure why this is going too fast for you, but i’m all
in favor of letting city kids choose to divert their tax dollars to get seats in better schools.

That’s pretty simple. if you still don’t get it, that’s your issue, not mine. perhaps try loosening the straps in your tim foil hat. if i could put it in a pop-up book for guy I would, maybe that would help you understand.

it doesn’t necessarily mean forcing suburb kids to cities. but sometimes it leads to that. here in CT, they have talked about regionalizing schools. No thanks.

Liberals oppose school choice. Conservatives love school choice.

Going too fast for you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

not sure why this is going too fast for you, but i’m all
in favor of letting city kids choose to divert their tax dollars to get seats in better schools.

That’s pretty simple. if you still don’t get it, that’s your issue, not mine. perhaps try loosening the straps in your tim foil hat. if i could put it in a pop-up book for guy I would, maybe that would help you understand.

it doesn’t necessarily mean forcing suburb kids to cities. but sometimes it leads to that. here in CT, they have talked about regionalizing schools. No thanks. NIMBY

Liberals oppose school choice. Conservatives love school choice.

Going too fast for you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oddly enough, Vermont has school choice.

So it looks like you are wrong, or just mislead again and reciting propaganda that fits your narrative.

And no, we are not paying for kids to go to a religion based school.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Oddly enough, Vermont has school choice.



And no, we are not paying for kids to go to a religion based school.

So in the same post, you deny that liberals oppose school choice. Then in the next sentence, you adamantly oppose school choice.

You can’t even agree with yourself. That’s what I call howling at the moon.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i’m not mentioning black on black crime to deflect away from the police. people
with IQs above 65 can think about two things at once. im sorry if you don’t fall into that category.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ok jim you win i can't defeat your idiocy next time we talk about a topic .. I'll start talking about tuna fishing even if it's not relevant .. Just to prove . I can talk about 2 different things at the same time

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

ok jim you win i can't defeat your idiocy next time we talk about a topic .. I'll start talking about tuna fishing even if it's not relevant .. Just to prove . I can talk about 2 different things at the same time

According to Spence, 13 unarmed blacks were killed by cops in 2019. According to the FBI, 8,600 blacks were homicide victims in 2020/

I say we should work to address police brutality and black on black crime, but that we should allocate resources and energy to those problems according to the magnitude of each issue. One issue claims 660 times more black lives than the other.

You say it's "idiocy" to give any weight to the difference in magnitude of those crises. You are entitled to that opinion.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

According to Spence, 13 unarmed blacks were killed by cops in 2019.

I didn't say that.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

According to Spence, 13 unarmed blacks were killed by cops in 2019. According to the FBI, 8,600 blacks were homicide victims in 2020/

I say we should work to address police brutality and black on black crime, but that we should allocate resources and energy to those problems according to the magnitude of each issue. One issue claims 660 times more black lives than the other.

You say it's "idiocy" to give any weight to the difference in magnitude of those crises. You are entitled to that opinion.

Any unarmed Americans is to many no matter their Race to be killed by police.. not sure why expecting more from law enforcement is anti law enforcement to the Right? They sees accountability as a woke or a CRT suggestion .. apparently

Ps for the record your black on black crime is still irrelevant to the police brutality question.. I guess you still never read the article in the link I provided
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Any unarmed Americans is to many no matter their Race to be killed by police.. not sure why expecting more from law enforcement is anti law enforcement to the Right? They sees accountability as a woke or a CRT suggestion .. apparently

Ps for the record your black on black crime is still irrelevant to the police brutality question.. I guess you still never read the article in the link I provided
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“any is too many.”

i agreed and already said so.

but 13 isnt 8,600.

priorities. you ever have to set priorities, or do you always assign the same
weight to everything?

this is beyond stupid.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Any unarmed Americans is to many

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is an unreasonable standard....this is like saying any death from cancer is too many....well, in the real world...it's gonna happen

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is an unreasonable standard....this is like saying any death from cancer is too many....well, in the real world...it's gonna happen

exactly, you send cops into gravely dangerous situations, they’re pumped up and scared like anyone would be, mistakes will be made. it’s tragic, and we can try to train them better, but mistakes will be made, just like good faith mistakes are made by doctors in hospitals.

it would be nice if we could
differentiate between well intentioned mistakes ( say, Brianna Taylor where the cops walked into a barrage of fire) and murder ( like the Floyd case). and it would be nice if we didn’t always assume race was the main motive when we have no idea.

Sadly, that kind of honesty doesn’t help democrats win elections. What helps them, is pretending this issue is much worse than it actually is. And if innocent cops get killed as a result of portraying them as racist assassins, the DNC has decided that’s a price they’re willing to pay
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

exactly, you send cops into gravely dangerous situations, they’re pumped up and scared like anyone would be, mistakes will be made. it’s tragic, and we can try to train them better, but mistakes will be made, just like good faith mistakes are made by doctors in hospitals.

it would be nice if we could
differentiate between well intentioned mistakes ( say, Brianna Taylor where the cops walked into a barrage of fire) Jim they conducted a house invasion with a licensed gun owner who was defending himself and murder ( like the Floyd case). and it would be nice if we didn’t always assume race was the main motive when we have no idea.




Sadly, that kind of honesty doesn’t help democrats win elections. What helps them, is pretending this issue is much worse than it actually is. And if innocent cops get killed as a result of portraying them as racist assassins, the DNC has decided that’s a price they’re willing to pay
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim you are not talking about good faith mistakes . your 2 examples are not examples of good faith mistakes. talk about lack of honesty

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is an unreasonable standard....this is like saying any death from cancer is too many....well, in the real world...it's gonna happen

If any one Asks for any police Standards it magically becomes an unreasonable standard

PS i can't shoot and kill you with Cancer.. but why is setting a goal for Zero cancer or zero shooting of unarmed people so controversial... its just a goal... But to even try is outrageous

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Any unarmed Americans is to many no matter their Race to be killed by police..

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what are your thoughts on Ashli Babbit?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

what are your thoughts on Ashli Babbit?

a seditionist who got exactly what was coming to her.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

what are your thoughts on Ashli Babbit?

Ah the Babbit false equivalence nonsense


I don't recall the capitol police saying they shot her because they thought she had a weapon (but would haven't been outrageous if they had).. with her hands up .. but please keep trying to suggest she wasn't actively trying to break into an area with our representatives to . with clear intent to do Harm . against orders from law enforcement to not enter...

I thought you would have said she should of complied or in your words
"if I do something that causes the police to show up and restrain me and I'm uncooperative or give them reason to think I have a weapon or I'm belligerent and resist arrest, yup...I expect bad things will happen to be."

which is it ?

Almost immediately, white supremacist and anti-government extremists began trying to use Ashli Babbitt's death as a clarion call for recruits. and now Trump what a surprise

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Ah the Babbit false equivalence nonsense


I don't recall the capitol police saying they shot her because they thought she had a weapon (but would haven't been outrageous if they had).. with her hands up .. but please keep trying to suggest she wasn't actively trying to break into an area with our representatives to . with clear intent to do Harm . against orders from law enforcement to not enter...

I thought you would have said she should of complied or in your words
"if I do something that causes the police to show up and restrain me and I'm uncooperative or give them reason to think I have a weapon or I'm belligerent and resist arrest, yup...I expect bad things will happen to be."

which is it ?

Almost immediately, white supremacist and anti-government extremists began trying to use Ashli Babbitt's death as a clarion call for recruits. and now Trump what a surprise

yes there is no evidence that she ever had a gun or even a taser and they still shot her...

I have never argued that she shouldn't have been shot....I've repeatedly said she shouldn't have been there doing what she was doing...just like so many other examples that you like to characterize as police brutality and worse

you are remarkably inconsistent.....nice job dropping a white supremacist reference

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

but please keep trying to suggest she wasn't actively trying to break into an area with our representatives to . with clear intent to do Harm . against orders from law enforcement to not enter...

you and GS have a remarkable ability to claim that others are trying to suggest things when there is no such suggestion.....


Originally Posted by scottw View Post

what are your thoughts on Ashli Babbit?